Monday, June 28, 2004

“Indeed, the film’s long opening movement, which segues from the stolen election of 2000 and Bush’s 2001 summer vacation through the events of 9-11 and the cowboy invasion of Afghanistan to dwell on the oil politics uniting the Bushies with the Saudis, is the strongest filmmaking of Moore’s career.” – Village Voice

“… his film grows steadily darker, and Moore largely disappears from it, as he focuses on people such as Lila Lipscomb, from Moore’s hometown of Flint, Mich.; she reads a letter from her son, written days before he was killed in Iraq. It urges his family to work for Bush’s defeat.” – Roger Ebert

“Disagree with Moore’s politics, if you must. Disagree with his filmmaking methods, if you wish. Nonetheless, ‘Fahrenheit 9/11’ � rushed into theaters after its surprise grand-prize win at last month’s Cannes International Film Festival � is an often powerful film, and the most focused work of the director’s career. It’s got a bit of his trademark humor and a few of his microphone-shoving stunts, but its real story is in Lipscomb’s eyes.” – Seattle Times

“For the most part, he lets his subjects speak for themselves, whether it’s National Security Advisor Condoleeza Rice testifying before the 9/11 commission, Secretary of State Colin Powell reaching to connect the supposed dots between Al Qaeda and Iraq, or the president addressing a group of his supporters as ‘the haves and have mores.'” – Reel.com

“Most people reading this already know whether they’re going or not. The question is whether “Fahrenheit 9/11” will be worth the trip. In many ways this is Moore’s best film; he exercises restraint that has been notably lacking in such documentaries as “Roger & Me,” “The Big One” and the Oscar-winning “Bowling for Columbine.” In those movies, Moore affected the persona of a rumpled Everyman bravely confronting malign corporate and cultural forces; he also never missed a chance to be seen on camera, usually in a self-serving pose of righteous indignation. (Who can forget how courageously he placed the photograph of a gun violence victim in Charlton Heston’s driveway?)” – Washington Post

“Moore is something new in American film, an uncompromising provocateur. Film for him is a personal medium, as personal as his anger at corporate greed, government duplicity and economic inequity. More than anyone, he’s broadened the art of documentary, adding impassioned, essayistic advocacy to its repertoire of styles. He is an indispensable treasure, and his imperfections are part of the reason, because they mark him as real.” – Houston Chronicle

“Moore is a provocateur, a blowhard, an entertainer. But he is also a patriot. As a director he has consistently advocated not merely for the rights of a citizen, but perhaps one of the chief and founding obligations of being a citizen: to make government accountable to its people.” – Denver Post

“Assessing the merits of a political film is a tricky business. Obviously, its quality is partly a function of its power to persuade, but its persuasiveness is in the eye of the beholder. Yet there are other things to consider: The movie’s passion. Its serious purpose. Its tone. Its mix of words and images, and the way both linger in the mind. There’s the way the movie fashions its arguments, and the cumulative effect the experience provides — what you feel walking out, what you think about the next day.

By all these measures, ‘Fahrenheit 9/11’ is Michael Moore’s best film. “Certainly, it’s a career landmark, the film that signals his transition from political entertainer to political thinker, from propagandist to idiosyncratic journalist, from colorful gadfly to patriot. If “Bowling for Columbine” was a step, this is a leap, in which Moore vaults past Will Rogers into some territory all his own. In the 90-year history of the American feature film, there has never been a popular election-year documentary like this one.” – SF Chronicle

“A passionate, clearly articulated, if sloppily structured indictment of the president, his ties to the bin Laden family, his relentless push for war in Iraq and, as portrayed by Moore, an ineptitude bordering on the criminal.” – Newsday

“(It’s) a compelling, persuasive film, at odds with the White House effort to present Bush as a strong leader. He comes across as a shallow, inarticulate man, simplistic in speech and inauthentic in manner. If the film is not quite as electrifying as Moore’s “Bowling for Columbine,” that may be because Moore has toned down his usual exuberance and was sobered by attacks on the factual accuracy of elements of “Columbine”; playing with larger stakes, he is more cautious here, and we get an op-ed piece, not a stand-up routine. But he remains one of the most valuable figures on the political landscape, a populist rabble-rouser, humorous and effective; the outrage and incredulity in his film are an exhilarating response to Bush’s determined repetition of the same stubborn sound bites.” – Roger Ebert

“Like him or not, once you see it, you�ll have to admit that the guy has balls.” – Stefan Halley